alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Cuerpos de color grisáceo y canela con manchas 

color marrón y alas con manchas color marrón

Huevos Ninfa

Los adultos son del tamaño de una mosca, 

aproximadamente un octavo de pulgada 

de largo.

Al acercarse a estos, brincan o vuelan.

Los últimos dos 

segmentos de 

las antenas son 

negros.

CICLO DE VIDA

Huevos

PSÍLIDO 

ASIÁTICO DE

LOS CÍTRICOS

Las ninfas se mueven 

lento, no pueden volar 

y son difíciles de ver.

Adulto

Los huevos en forma de 

almendras y de color 

amarillo/anaranjado a 

menudo se encuentran 

en las grietas y los 

pliegues de las hojas.
FÍJESE EN LO SIGUIENTE

• PAC visibles o sus secreciones cerosas

• Brotes amarillos

• Muerte regresiva de las ramillas

• Árboles atrofi ados con escaso follaje 

que podrían  orecer fuera de 

temporada

• Frutas duras, amargas y asimétricas 

con semillas abortadas pequeñas y oscuras

• Frutas que permanecen verdes aun cuando están maduras 

• Hojas con manchas asimétricas

ElDAÑO QUE CAUSA

El PAC les causa daños serios a los cítricos y a las plantas de la 

familia de los cítricos. La infestación en plantas nuevas resulta 

en brotes quemados y hojas torcidas. Los PAC también son 

portadores de la bacteria que causa el enverdecimiento de los 

cítricos, lo que resulta en la propagación de esta enfermedad a 

plantas cítricas saludables. El enverdecimiento de los cítricos es 

una de las enfermedades más serias que afecta a los cítricos a 

nivel mundial. Una vez que un árbol se enferma, no hay cura. 

LO QUE USTED PUEDE HACER

• No transporte plantas o frutas cítricas de producción local de 

un estado a otro.

• Sólo compre frutas o árboles cítricos de transportistas 

que cumplan con las restricciones bajo cuarentenas 

federales. Pregúnteles a los vendedores si sus productos 

cumplen con las cuarentenas federales.

• Permita que los trabajadores agrícolas autorizados entren 

a su propiedad para inspeccionar si hay PAC. 

• Reporte cada vez que vea esta plaga en

PlagasHambrientas.com.

Las ninfas producen 

excreciones blancas 

y cerosas

Para obtener más información, visite: 

Departamento de Agricultura de los Estados Unidos

Servicio de Inspección Sanitaria de Animales y Plantas

El Departamento de Agricultura de EEUU es un proveedor y empleador que ofrece igualdad de 

oportunidades. Material del programa núm. 2125-ACP-S Publicado en septiembre de 2012

PLAGASHAMBRIENTAS.COM
Exhibit 99.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual Report of Milestone Scientific, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Thomas M. Stuckey, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Thomas M. Stuckey
------------------------------------------
Thomas M. Stuckey, Chief Financial Officer

April 15, 2003
Exhibit 10.5


 


 


Garden State Securities Engagement Agreement


 


Dated June 30, 2016


 


 


 


Please refer to the accompanying PDF document labeled Exhibit 10.5.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Ibis Technology Corporation (the *“Company”*) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the *“Report”*), I, William J Schmidt Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company

 
| Dated: March 30, 2005        |
|------------------------------|
|                         |
|                         |
| /s/ ***William J. Schmidt*** |   |
| William  J. Schmidt          |
| ChiefFinancialOfficer        |

 

1
18900

#### Peters v. Ivey

Affirmed
# C_2021278EN.01000801.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/8

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 May 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Vereniging van Effectenbezitters v BP plc

(Case C-709/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 7(2) - Jurisdiction in tort, delict or quasi-delict - Place where the harmful event occurred - Damage consisting in purely financial loss)

(2021/C 278/09)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Vereniging van Effectenbezitters

Defendant: BP plc

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that the direct occurrence in an investment account of purely financial loss resulting from investment decisions taken as a result of information which is easily accessible worldwide but inaccurate, incomplete or misleading from an international listed company does not allow the attribution of international jurisdiction, on the basis of the place of the occurrence of the damage, to a court of the Member State in which the bank or investment firm in which the account is held has its registered office, where that firm was not subject to statutory reporting obligations in that Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 19, 20.1.2020.

---
Exhibit 31(b)
 CERTIFICATION
     Exchange Act Exchange Act
 (a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  By:
    /s/ WAYNE R. BROWNLEEWayne R. BrownleeExecutive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
#### Shenandoah Methodist Episcopal Church *versus*Robbins & Co.

1. In a suit against a church for a debt, the affidavit of defence was, that at. a meeting of the trustees of the church, plaintiff being one, and all the creditors', of the church being members, except a building association, plaintiff proposed' that if the creditors of the church would release their claims he would releaseliis; that the proposition was accepted by the creditors of the church, and in consequence of it he cancelled his claim ; the claim of the building association was paid in full by the trustees. *Held,*That the affidavit was insufficient,'the-payment to the association having destroyed the purpose of the offer to release.

2. A composition deed requires equality and fairness amongst all creditqrs; all. must execute it or none are bound.

March 7th, 1876.

Before Agnew, C. J., Sharswood, Mercur, Gordon, Paxson, and Woodward, JJ.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of *Schuylkill County,.*of January Term, 1876, No. 125.

This was an action of assumpsit, brought September 4th,. 1875, by Robbins & Co., against the Methodist Episcopal Church of Shenandoah, for lumber furnished to the defendants ; the plaintiffs’ claim being $203.42

The defendants filed an affidavit of defence, viz.:

That at a meeting of the trustees of the defendants on or about February, 1874, Elmer Robbins, one of the plaintiffs’ firm, and also a trustee of the defendants, made a proposition' to the creditors of the church, all of whom were members' of the church, except the Citizens’ Building and Loan Asso*362ciatiou, “ that if the creditors of the said church would release their claims agaiust the said church, the plaintiffs would release their claim that the proposition was accepted by the creditors of the church, and they had cancelled their claim “ in consequence of and in belief of the good faith of the proposition, and had paid off the building association as aforesaid their claim ; the claim of said association being paid in full by the trustees,” etc.

The Court entered judgment for the plaintiffs for want of ' a sufficient affidavit of defence, and the damages were assessed $236.75.

This was assigned for error on the removal of the record to the Supreme Court by the defendants.

*S. O. M. Holopeter*and *B. Bartholomew,*for plaintiffs in error.

*O. P. Bechtel,*for defendants in error.

Judgment was entered in the Supreme Court, March 13th, 1876.

Per Curiam :

The agreement to release, set forth in the affidavit, like a composition deed, demands equality and fairness among all the creditors; all must execute it or none will be bound. The affidavit discloses on its face that one of the creditors was paid in full by the trustees of the church. Now, unless the assent of the other creditors was obtained to the payment, it certainly destroyed the very purpose of the offer to release, to wit, that all the creditors should forego their claims. Eor this, and other reasons, the affidavit of defence was insufficient.

Judgment affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1026 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1026

 To amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to repeal a 
   provision prohibiting Federal agencies from procuring alternative 
                                 fuels.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 21, 2015

 Mr. Barrasso (for himself, Mr. Manchin, Mr. Hoeven, Ms. Heitkamp, and 
   Mr. Enzi) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to repeal a 
   provision prohibiting Federal agencies from procuring alternative 
                                 fuels.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``North American Alternative Fuels 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF PROHIBITION OF THE PROCUREMENT AND ACQUISITION OF 
              ALTERNATIVE FUELS.

    (a) In General.--Section 526 of the Energy Independence and 
Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140; 42 U.S.C. 17142) is repealed.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 30310 of title 51, United States 
Code, is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.23



GUST Amendment

Three Rivers Bank and Trust Company Pension Trust



WHEREAS, Three Rivers Bank and Trust Company (the Company) sponsors and maintains The Three Rivers Bank and Trust
Company Pension Trust, Plan No. 001 (the Plan);



WHEREAS, pursuant to Plan Section 12.01, the Company may modify and amend the Plan for any reason;



WHEREAS, to maintain the tax qualified status of the Plan and to comply with the July 10, 2002 IRS telephone request with respect to the Plans and
its related Trusts continued tax qualified and tax-exempt status, respectively, the Company desires to amend the Plan.



NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as follows:



|A. |  | The following provision is added after the word elect in Plan Section 1.28(b):
|-- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



, via written Plan amendment in accordance with IRS regulations,



|B. |  | The following provision is added at the beginning of Plan Section 16.05:
|-- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------



This Section 16.05 shall apply to limitation years commencing prior to January 1, 2000.



|C. |  | The following provision is added to Plan Section 16.04 after Sections 125,:
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------



132(f),



|D. |  | In all other respects, the Plan is affirmed.
|-- |  | --------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, through its duly authorized officer, the Company adopts the Amendments contained herein on this
 day of , 2002.



THREE RIVERS BANK AND TRUST COMPANYBy:Its:
# C_2020399EN.01001702.xml

| 23.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/17

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 30 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du travail de Liège — Belgium) — LM v Centre public d’action sociale de Seraing

(Case C-402/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Directive 2008/115/CE - Return of illegally staying third-country nationals - Parent of an adult child suffering from a serious illness - Return decision - Judicial remedy - Automatic suspensory effect - Safeguards pending return - Basic needs - Articles 7, 19 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)

(2020/C 399/24)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour du travail de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: LM

Defendant: Centre public d’action sociale de Seraing

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 5, 13 and 14 of Directive 2008/115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, read in the light of Article 7, Article 19(2) and Articles 21 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not provide, as far as possible, for the basic needs of a third-country national to be met where:

| — | that national has appealed against a return decision made in respect of him or her; |
| --- | --- |

—

that national has appealed against a return decision made in respect of him or her;

| — | the adult child of that third-country national is suffering from a serious illness; |
| --- | --- |

—

the adult child of that third-country national is suffering from a serious illness;

| — | the presence of that third-country national with that adult child is essential; |
| --- | --- |

—

the presence of that third-country national with that adult child is essential;

| — | an appeal was brought on behalf of that adult child against a return decision taken against him or her, the enforcement of which may expose that adult child to a serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration in his or her state of health, and |
| --- | --- |

—

an appeal was brought on behalf of that adult child against a return decision taken against him or her, the enforcement of which may expose that adult child to a serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration in his or her state of health, and

| — | that third-country national does not have the means to meet his or her needs himself or herself. |
| --- | --- |

—

that third-country national does not have the means to meet his or her needs himself or herself.

---

(1)  OJ C 255, 29.7.2019

---
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION


906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Perfumania Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 28, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Michael W. Katz, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:


|   |                                                                                                                      
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

|   |                                                                                                                                                     
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







By:By: /S/ Michael W. KatzMichael W. KatzPresident and Chief Executive OfficerSeptember 11, 2012
# C_2021431EN.01001801.xml

| 25.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/18

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 — NeXovation Inc. v European Commission

(Case C-665/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Aid in favour of the Nürburgring complex (Germany) - Decision declaring the aid partly incompatible with the internal market - Sale of the assets of the beneficiaries of the State aid found to be incompatible - Open, transparent, non-discriminatory and unconditional tender process - Decision declaring that the reimbursement of incompatible aid did not concern the new owner of the Nürburgring complex and that the latter did not receive new aid for the acquisition of that complex - Admissibility - Status as an interested party - Person individually concerned - Infringement of the procedural rights of the interested parties - Difficulties requiring the initiation of a formal investigation procedure - Justification)

(2021/C 431/17)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: NeXovation Inc. (represented: initially by A. von Bergwelt, M. Nordmann and L. Hettstedt, and subsequently by A. von Bergwelt and M. Nordmann, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, T. Maxian Rusche and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 19 June 2019, NeXovation v Commission (T-353/15, EU:T:2019:434), in so far as, by that judgment, the General Court of the European Union dismissed the action for annulment of the last indent of Article 1 of Commission Decision (EU) 2016/151 of 1 October 2014 on State aid SA.31550 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for Nürburgring; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 19 June 2019, NeXovation v Commission (T-353/15, EU:T:2019:434), in so far as, by that judgment, the General Court of the European Union dismissed the action for annulment of the last indent of Article 1 of Commission Decision (EU) 2016/151 of 1 October 2014 on State aid SA.31550 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for Nürburgring;

| 2. | Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;

| 3. | Annuls the last indent of Article 1 of Commission Decision (EU) 2016/151 of 1 October 2014 on the State aid SA.31550 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for Nürburgring; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Annuls the last indent of Article 1 of Commission Decision (EU) 2016/151 of 1 October 2014 on the State aid SA.31550 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for Nürburgring;

| 4. | Orders NeXovation Inc. and the European Commission to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders NeXovation Inc. and the European Commission to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 372, 4.11.2019.

---
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D23-3619

LT Case No. 2014-CFDB-303621

_____________________________

MESHAC M. ABENTEGO,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County.

Raul A. Zambrano, Judge.

Meshac Abentego, Chipley, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

February 6, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LAMBERT, JAY and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________